🔗 Share this article

The Australian bold action to prohibit social networking access for individuals under sixteen is creating waves worldwide. Officials, child protection groups, and guardians are watching with great interest to see if this tactic will inspire imitation for other nations.

European Trend

Across Europe, a rising group of nations are considering comparable bans.

• Denmark plans a prohibition on social media for youth below 15, with the leader declaring that smartphones and networks are "taking away our youngsters' childhood". A law could be enacted in the coming year.
• The Norwegian government is preparing to introduce a minimum age limit of 15, highlighting the need to shield children from the "power of the AI".
• Ireland is introducing a digital ID system to verify the age and identity of social media users. Authorities have suggested that an Australia-style ban remains "an measures in reserve".
• In Spain, the prime minister has called on the legislature to pass a proposal increasing the access age for joining social media to 16.
• In The French government, the head of state has proposed a ban for under-15s, and a parliamentary commission has endorsed a similar action, including an overnight "screen time restriction" for 15- to 18-year-olds.
• The government in The Dutch government has advised guardians to restrict their kids from social media until 15.

For the broader EU, the EU parliament has adopted a advisory resolution supporting a ban for teenagers under 16 without parental consent is provided. While it highlights of the "compulsive" quality of these platforms, the move does not create enforceable legislation.

"An effective age limit is a solid starting point," said the MEP driving the measure.

Britain: A Watchful Stance

In the UK, the government has kept open a future ban, emphasizing that "nothing is being dismissed" but maintaining any action must be "supported by robust data".

Previously, momentum grew behind a legislative effort to impose controls on social media use by teenagers, but it was ultimately modified. Nonetheless, the government vowed to further research the matter.

Campaign organizations have voiced warnings. A prominent charity founded by the relatives of a young person who took her own life after being exposed to disturbing online content argues that a blanket age ban may not improve online safety and could result in a "sudden drop-off" of exposure when young people become eligible.

"The Australian ban is a reaction to the refusal of the social media companies to build tools that are appropriate and fit for young users," said a leading child protection advocate.

The United States: A Decentralized Picture

Across America, action is primarily happening at the local level due to federal stalemate.

• Utah demands parental consent for under-18s to use social media and restricts nighttime use.
• The state of Florida has passed a bill prohibiting under-14s from accessing social media, though it faces legal challenges.
• Virginia has passed a law restricting teenagers to 60 minutes of social media access per day, with any further use needing adult consent.
• The state of Georgia, The state of Tennessee, and Louisiana have also passed laws requiring parental consent for minors to open social media presences.

Despite bipartisan support and proposals from certain figures to copy this example, a federal ban is currently seen as unlikely.

International Views

Beyond these regions, additional nations are similarly taking action.

• Malaysia aims to restrict social media for teenagers effective next year.
• Brazil has raised the required age for one major platform to 16.

But, world bodies strike a more cautious position. The UN children's agency has warned that social media bans have downsides and "could have unintended consequences". The agency points out that social networks can be a "critical link" for isolated children and that bans should not be a "substitute" for tech companies to prioritize user protection.

While this international discussion continues, the policies of this nation and others show that policymakers globally are less and less content to wait for tech companies to act voluntarily.